The Concept of Discourse in International Relations Theories

Öz

Language and speech are essential for our social existence. People use language to communicate with each other, exchange information, express their feelings, wishes and needs, respond, understand and react. Basically, discourse can be defined as the space in which intersubjective meaning is produced, sustained, transformed and accordingly becomes the constituent of social reality. The concept of discourse has been a buzzword in the critical international relations literature for nearly three decades. Discourse Analysis is the study of language in use. There are many different approaches to Discourse Analysis. In this article, the concept of discourse is analyzed from a theoretical perspective. In this context, the foundations of the relationship between language and discourse are analyzed; discourse analysis as a popular methodology is examined; the relationship between critical theory and critical discourse analysis is evaluated and finally, the critique of the positivist tradition is emphasized. Thus, the discursive approach to international relations, which has resulted in significant scholarly expansion and deepening in recent years, is analyzed in detail.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Discourse
• Discourse Analysis
• Critical Theory
• International Relations Theory

Uluslararası İlişkiler Kuramlarında Söylem Kavramı

Öz

Dil ve konuşma, sosyal varlığımız için gereklidir. İnsanlar birbirleriyle iletişim kurmak, bilgi alışverişinde bulunmak, duygu, istek ve ihtiyaçlarını ifade etmek, cevap vermek, anlamak ve tepki vermek için dili kullanmaktadır. Söylem, temelde, öznelerarası anlamın üretildiği, sürdürüldüğü, dönüştürüldüğü ve buna bağlı olarak toplumsal gerçekliğin kurucusu haline geldiği alan olarak tanımlanabilmektedir. Söylem kavramı özellikle eleştirel uluslararası ilişkiler literatüründe yaklaşık otuz yıldır moda bir terim haline gelmiş durumdadır. Söylem Analizi ise kullanımdaki dilin incelenmesidir. Söylem Analizine yönelik birçok farklı yaklaşım vardır. Bu makalede, söylem kavramı kuramsal perspektiften incelenmektedir. Bu kapsamda, dil ve söylem ilişkisinin temelleri analiz edilmekte; popüler bir metodoloji olarak söylem analizi incelenmekte; eleştirel teori ve eleştirel söylem analizi ilişkisi değerlendirilmekte ve son olarak pozitivist geleneğin eleştirisi üzerinde durulmaktadır. Böylelikle, son yıllarda uluslararası ilişkilere yönelik önemli bilimsel genişleme ve derinleşme ile sonuçlanan söylemsel yaklaşım detaylı bir şekilde tahlil edilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Söylem
• Söylem Analizi
• Eleştirel Teori
• Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorileri

Kaynakça

1. Angermuller, J. (2018). Accumulating Discursive Capital, Valuating Subject Positions: from Marx to Foucault. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(4), 414-425.
2. Angermuller, J., Maingueneau, D. ve Wodak, R. (2014). The Discourse Studies Reader: Main Currents in Theory and Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
3. Aydın-Düzgit, S. ve Rumelili, B. (2019). Discourse Analysis: Strengths and Shortcomings. All Azimuth, 8(2), 285-305
4. Beetz, J., Herzog, B. ve Maesse, J. (2018). Introduction: Special Issue Marx & Discourse. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(4), 321-324.
5. Bhaskar, R. (1997). A Realist Theory of Science. Londra: Verso.
6. Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Bryant, J. M. (1994). Evidence and Explanation in History and Sociology. British Journal of Sociology, 45 (March), 3-19.
8. Campbell, D. (1993). Politics without Principles: Sovereignty, Ethics, and the Narratives of the Gulf War. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

9. Coates, J. (2012). Gender and Discourse Analysis. James Paul Gee ve Michael Handford (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis içinde (s. 90-103). Londra ve New York: Routledge.
10. Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical Discourse Analysis. James Paul Gee ve Michael Handford (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis içinde (ss. 9-20). Londra ve New York: Routledge.
11. Fierke, K. M. (2002). Links Across the Abyss: Language and Logic in International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 46, 331–354.
12. Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge. Londra: Routledge.
13. Gee, J. P. (2011). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis Theory and Method. Londra ve New York: Routledge.
14. Gee, J. P. ve Handford M. (2012). The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Londra ve New York: Routledge.
15. Gill, R. (2000). Discourse Analysis. Martin W. Bauer ve George Gaskell (Ed.), Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound: A Practical Handbook içinde (ss. 172-190) Los Angeles ve Londra: SAGE Publications.
16. Godinho, L. (2016). Discourse and International Relations: A Theoretical and Methodological Approach. JANUS.NET e-journal of International Relations, 7(2), 1-13.
17. Hansen, L. (2006). Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War. Londra ve New York: Routledge.
18. Hart, C. ve Cap, P. (2014). Introduction. Christopher Hart ve Piotr Cap (Ed.), Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies içinde (ss. 1-15). Londra: Bloomsbury.
19. Hollway, W. (1983). Heterosexual Sex: Power and Desire for the Other. Sue Cartledge and Joanna Ryan (Ed.) Sex and Love: New Thoughts on Old Contradictions içinde (ss. 124–140). Londra: Women’s Press.
20. Holzscheiter, A. (2014). Between Communicative Interaction and Structures of Signification: Discourse Theory and Analysis in International Relations. International Studies Perspectives, 15, 142–162.
21. Holzscheiter, A. (2010). Children’s Rights in International Politics. The Transformative Power of Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
22. Howarth, D. (2018). Marx, Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Negotiating an Ambiguous Legacy. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(4), 377-389.
23. Jorgensen, M. W. ve Phillips, L. J. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. Londra: Sage Publications.
24. Joseph, J. ve Roberts, J. M. (2004). Introduction: Realism, Discourse and Deconstruction. Jonathan Joseph ve John Michael Roberts (Ed.), Realism Discourse and Deconstruction içinde (s. 1-19). Londra ve New York: Routledge.
25. Lazar, M. M. (2007). Politicizing Gender in Discourse: Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis as Political Perspective and Praxis. Michelle M. Lazar (Ed.), Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Gender, Power and Ideology in Discourse içinde (ss. 1-28). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
26. Lustick, I. S. (1996). History, Historiography, and Political Science: Multiple Historical records and the Problem of Selection Bias. American Political Science Review, 90(3), 605-618.
27. Maesse, J. (2018). Discursive Marxism: How Marx Treats the Economy and What Discourse Studies Contribute to It. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(4), 364-376.
28. Milliken, J. (1999) The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods. European Journal of International Relations, 5(2), 225-254.
29. Neumann, I. B. (2008). Discourse Analysis. Audie Klotz ve Deepa Prakash (Ed.), Qualitative Methods in International Relations: A Pluralist Guide içinde (ss. 61-77). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
30. Sims-Schouten, W., Riley, S. C. E., ve Willig, C. (2007). Critical Realism in Discourse Analysis: A Presentation of a Systematic Method of Analysis Using Women’s Talk of Motherhood, Childcare and Female Employment as an Example. Theory & Psychology, 17(1), 101-124.
31. van Dijk, T. A. (2014). Discourse-Cognition-Society: Current State and Prospects of the Socio-Cognitive Approach to Discourse. Christopher Hart ve Piotr Cap (Ed.), Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies içinde (ss. 121-146). Londra: Bloomsbury.
32. Weldes, J. (2001). Globalisation is Science Fiction. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 30(3), 647–667.
33. Wodak, R. (2009). Discourse Analysis: Problems, Findings, Perspectives. Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 10 (1/2), 125-132.